I'm somewhat wary about making this thread, but I feel this is an issue that needs addressed asap before further tagging discussions happen.
Before I go further though I implore and and all people who post here, please, please, stay civil, provide discussion and logical points, not arguments, anger, insults and/or general vitriol.

The point I would like to see addressed is the case-by-case decisions on tag validity.

My opinion(s) on the situation:
By handling things on a case-by-case basis, the system inherently creates enmity and arguments.
For a system to operate we need defined, clear rules that we can point to in any (or at least the vast majority of) situation.
If exceptions need to be made, that's fair, and understandable(see character names/artist names/etc. that are already defined exceptions to TWYS), but these exceptions should be clearly defined and easy to follow rules, not judgements made by an admin(s) in accordance to their opinion(s) of a specific case.
By having those clear definitions we would eliminate argument as we could simply point to a rule to show if a tag is/isn't valid.

If there are faults to my point here, please do explain them.
But I would like to again ask that discussion remain cool headed, and civil on the part of all people in this discussion.
If you are upset, or angry at anything presented here and can't avoid that being a part of your post, then just don't post a reply.
Take some time to cool down, and consider a clear, logical, and calm manner to present your difference of opinion.

Peekaboo said:
I really doubt this will get any good results. imo the people who were supposed to take a week to cool down now that the other thread was locked will come here and indirectly continue the drama. Here's to hoping some progress is made instead, although I doubt it.

Let's try to stay constructive, hmm?

Thank you Halite for being the voice of reason in this case. There is nothing that you have said that I disagree with here.

Peekaboo said:
Okidoki, in that case.

I think the only accepted exception to TWYS should be when there's a large amount of users that are for the change/against the suggested change. The problem with that is that if the change takes place, the users who didn't want it to take happen in the first place will get mad and may not let it go. I'm not quite sure if this is possible or not, but would it be possible to maybe have some kind of poll for the users to vote on separate TWYS battles?

As an example, someone wants to get rid of the [insert tag here], other users want the tag to stay. A poll is put up, the users who visit the forum thread and/or the tag wiki page just have to vote Yes or No. At the end of a set date the votes are counted. Unless the Yes/No votes have reached a set amount the vote won't pass/will pass.

In my opinion that is the only way exceptions to TWYS will ever be able to pass or even be discussed without drama, some kind of vote/counter showing how many people who are for and against it.

Edit: Might be a rubbish argument because I'm hyped up on caffeine and sugar.

Mostly fair points I believe, but we do try to not simply allow majority rule on these things.
And that's what voting tends toward.

While that's a laudable concept, Peekaboo, it just turns it into a mass of emotion on both sides because it makes everything ultimately subjective. You've probably seen how angry I got when I was defending the color_dragon species tags, or how frustrated I've been with the MLP tag arguments at times. Imagine that but on an expanded scale.

While yes we currently 'vote' towards keeping or getting rid of a tag, it should be more based on "does this fit tagging guidelines", than "is this popular enough to stay". As an example, imagine if the brony userbase started voting on all the brony tags to keep them, regardless of usefulness, because they are fandom terms. Note I'm using MLP here as an example that isn't subject just to MLP, but any fandom's popular support or lack thereof.

(NB: Please tell me if this reads too emotionally or too negatively, and I'll try rewriting it to make it parse as I'm trying to without that.)

In my opinion, we should have a questionnaire to see if a tag is valid or not.

1. Does the tag help the site in any way?
2. Does the tag help users find what they are looking for?
3. Is the tag original?

Let's say a user creates a tag and he puts "ballsack". To find out if the tag is valid or not, we go to the questionnaire. If we can answer "yes" to all of the three questions, then it's valid. If not, then it's invalid. In this case, "ballsack" may help the site and help users find what they are looking for but it's not original because we have balls for it so it's invalid.

Peekaboo said:
Hm, wouldn't that put joke tags in a pinch?
Take lost_my_keys for example.

1. I don't think it would classify as helping the site in any way, it's a joke tag that only people who are aware of use and users who are unaware of it wouldn't know it's a tag used for images of characters getting an arm up the vagoo/poop chute.

2. Same as above, only users who know of it will find it useful. Other users would get the same result by just searching for fisting.

3. I'm not sure if originality should play a role in determining if a tag should stay or not. In this case lost_my_keys isn't original since it's basically just a tag put on on any images where deep fisting is taking place.

I also wanted to add that I love the lost_my_keys tag, and would hate to see it go. It really is a conundrum deciding these kind of things. :/

Exception to joke tags

TheHuskyK9 said:
Exception to joke tags

So now even a questionaire would have exceptions?, meh I might be the only one but I still think the current system is fine, it would just need people to remember to stay calm while discussing...

Butterscotch said:
So now even a questionaire would have exceptions?, meh I might be the only one but I still think the current system is fine, it would just need people to remember to stay calm while discussing...

The questionnaire doesn't apply to joke tags because they're all jokey and such. In my opinion, the current system has some tiny holes we need to fill and staying calm would help tremendously when trying to fix something

Butterscotch said:
So now even a questionaire would have exceptions?, meh I might be the only one but I still think the current system is fine, it would just need people to remember to stay calm while discussing...

Current system is fine, until we start adding exceptions.

If we're going to allow any exceptions then they have to follow rules as well, so we can evenly and logically apply those exceptions.
In the questionnaire style example, you would have a separate set of questions to qualify it as a specific type of exception.
As an example, though likely not a perfect one, the joke tags exception could have set of questions along the lines of:
Is this tagging a well known meme/joke?
Is the joke prevalent enough to justify a joke tag?
etc.

Then if it fit that specific exception that has been added to the rules it would be a valid exception tag of that variety.
If it fits no exception and doesn't follow the TWYS general guidelines then it's no good.

Edit: This isn't to replace the current system, but to add flexibility into it for the benefit of users in general.

This would also prevent the: If this tag is valid why shouldn't this tag also be valid?
Because the other tag would either not fit the exceptions guidelines and be invalid, or it would fit them, and be declared a good tag.

Hmm... That actually sounds pretty good, Halite. But what catagories would we use? How many questions? What if someone uses the system to put through a slew of tags that are acceptable, then tries to push for more similar tags on the basis that the first got through and is related, but that are not as valid as the first tag (In other words, trying to force a larger exception such as the name changes)? Who would write such a questionnaire? Where would it be implimented?

Ack so many questions.

123easy said:
But what categories would we use?

Any that were agreed upon in the same way as any rule change.

How many questions?

Would depend on the specific exception, but I would imagine the typical amount would be around 2-5 questions.

What if someone uses the system to put through a slew of tags that are acceptable, then tries to push for more similar tags on the basis that the first got through and is related, but that are not as valid as the first tag (In other words, trying to force a larger exception such as the name changes)?

If it doesn't fit the specific agreed upon criteria, then they would have to try to get a change in the criteria, which would then be a rule change discussion, not a simple tag validation/invalidation.
Which is fine, if it gets approval, but it's not something one person could just force through.

Who would write such a questionnaire?

The admins with community input, as with other rules changes.

Where would it be implemented?

The specific exceptions could be listed along with the TWYS rules, or as their own wiki page that is linked to in the TWYS page.
As well a link in the main rules would be a good idea regardless of how specifically it's implemented.

I haven't had much chance to keep this going since I spilled scotch on my laptop over new years'.
But I'm making do on my tablet until I get it back from repairs.

Any chance of some Admin input on these ideas?
I'd hoped to see some since this would be affecting them significantly, and would require full staff support to move forward with.

I'd really like to see less tagging arguements, and I think that this, or at least some form of more defined guidelines, as opposed to simply making a ruling for each individual case, would help move toward that end.
(That last sentence probably has too many commas... Ah well.)

Halite said:
I haven't had much chance to keep this going since I spilled scotch on my laptop over new years'.
But I'm making do on my tablet until I get it back from repairs.

Any chance of some Admin input on these ideas?
I'd hoped to see some since this would be affecting them significantly, and would require full staff support to move forward with.

I'd really like to see less tagging arguements, and I think that this, or at least some form of more defined guidelines, as opposed to simply making a ruling for each individual case, would help move toward that end.
(That last sentence probably has too many commas... Ah well.)

We have touched upon this briefly, in addition to a couple of our own examples. I will bring this up again and get a consensus, then we'll bump this post so we can discuss it.

EDFDarkAngel1 said:
We have touched upon this briefly, in addition to a couple of our own examples. I will bring this up again and get a consensus, then we'll bump this post so we can discuss it.

Wonderful, thank you for the response.